^Pap pics are taken on the street or public areas but these nude pics were private. I think there´s a big difference.

I don't necessarily agree with you here, but that's fine. Pap pics are still a violation of privacy even if it is in a 'public' setting. At times these paps intrude holidays, weddings, and funerals. Surely these could also be regarded as private? It's essentially pictures published without consent of the celeb. While one can only assume that Jennifer and the others fully consented posing for these nudies, the images were published without their consent too.
The point I'm really trying to make is that all those 'Stars: They're just like us' features and pap pics spurred the interest in these leakings. The need for us to know absolutely every aspect about celebs, private or not, just went to a new level. This is not some sexist vendetta against women as many would like to believe.

The reaction I´ve seen in numerous venues is of the sort of "it´s her fault for taking nude pics", that to me is misogynist. And these comments are from both men and women...
And the women posting naked pics on sites, as long as is their choice is an act of personal freedom. These celebs didn´t choose to have the pics made public.

Men get the "it's his own fault too". Men also get less sympathy and more ridicule than these women are getting when their naked pics are made public. Remember Anthony Weiner? Brett Favre? Chriss Brown? Jamie Foxx? They were all ridiculed as being idiots for not being more careful. Additionally, there were no public outcry about their invasion of privacy. Nobody cared that these men maybe didn't want these pictures released.

Even in this case, there are also pictures of one of the best baseball players. Nobody cares that his photos were released. But we HAVE to protect the women.

Men get the "it's his own fault too". Men also get less sympathy and more ridicule than these women are getting when their naked pics are made public. Remember Anthony Weiner? Brett Favre? Chriss Brown? Jamie Foxx? They were all ridiculed as being idiots for not being more careful. Additionally, there were no public outcry about their invasion of privacy. Nobody cared that these men maybe didn't want these pictures released.

Even in this case, there are also pictures of one of the best baseball players. Nobody cares that his photos were released. But we HAVE to protect the women.

I don't know why anyone would have any sympathy for them. Apart from Anythony Weiner, I had no knowledge that the others had nudes leaked. Besides Anthony Weiner sent his nudes to a much younger woman whilst engaged or married to another woman, Brett Favre who was sexting another woman whilst married and Chris Brown is awful so I don't see why anyone ought to feel sorry for them. And didn't Anthony Weiner upload his pics onto social media anyway? No one actually invaded his privacy. I like Jamie so I feel for him. If Jennifer Lawrence, Kirsten Dunst or Kate Upton uploaded their pics onto twitter by accident like the girl from Paramore did, then obviously they would be responsible, but they didn't.

Society is much harsher on women, it's a patriarchy. From the moment that they are born, they are immediately put under much harsher criticism so I am quite happy that for once that the media are protecting and supporting women instead of piling on the criticism like the usually do.

I don't know why anyone would have any sympathy for them. Apart from Anythony Weiner, I had no knowledge that the others had nudes leaked. Besides Anthony Weiner sent his nudes to a much younger woman whilst engaged or married to another woman, Brett Favre who was sexting another woman whilst married and Chris Brown is awful so I don't see why anyone ought to feel sorry for them. And didn't Anthony Weiner upload his pics onto social media anyway? No one actually invaded his privacy. I like Jamie so I feel for him. If Jennifer Lawrence, Kirsten Dunst or Kate Upton uploaded their pics onto twitter by accident like the girl from Paramore did, then obviously they would be responsible, but they didn't.

Society is much harsher on women, it's a patriarchy. From the moment that they are born, they are immediately put under much harsher criticism so I am quite happy that for once that the media are protecting and supporting women instead of piling on the criticism like the usually do.

So you don't feel bad for them because you don't like them. They deserved to get what happened to them because they're bad people. What's the difference what kind of people they are, or what they were doing. Cheating or no cheating, none of these actresses are perfect either. The problem with all those is that their privacy was beached and pictures were made public which shouldn't have been made public.

You don't have any sympathy for men, then turn around and complain about patriarchy. Lol, really can't make this stuff up.

And regarding the bolded parts. So are these women getting protected, or getting blamed? I thought everyone was complaining that these women are at 'fault'. Make up your mind, please. But regardless, this is hardly the only time the media is protecting women.

Really though, this whole thing has very little to do with sexism and nothing to do with misogyny. If there's anything there it's the double standard that you just displayed where the men are always the ones to blame.

^ I don't see anywhere in my post where I made a general statement about all men and said that I don't sympathise with all of them. I just used the examples that you provided. I think guys like Josh Hutcherson and that guy from 5SOS deserved sympathy when their nudes got leaked and I think they did. They seem like pretty nice people, just like Jennifer Lawrence, Kirsten Dunst, and Brie Larson do. There are many women that I hold in contempt for various reasons that if this occurred to in the same circumstances as those men that you cited, that I would have zero sympathy for.

I'm not going go further into society, patriarchy, sexism and misogyny as I may derail the thread and violate some terms and conditions as it is something that I am incredibly passionate about.

Where are all these male nude leeks? I´ve never even heard of them while these leeks were reported on my local news (meaning that this is worldwide news). Is that sexist? I think so... from the view that woman´s bodies are regarded for enjoyment but not men´s?
I´m ranting a bit but we see this all the time in movies, women show boobs/butts/vaginas but men don´t show penis...

^ that's because men and women are not only phisically , but also psicologically different. Why do you think there are hundreds of men magazines showing women scantily dressed and the magazines aimed for women, like cosmopolitan or such don't show any nude male model showing his pennis? And they are made by women for women. It has nothing to do with sexism, it because we are different. But sometimes we mistake having the same rights with being equal, and it is not the same.

Not meaning to offend you, Birkin but your post right there is patriarchal belief at its best imo.
Mainstream fashion mags like Cosmo dont show female nudity either, unless is for a medical article like eg breast cancer. Anyone remembers the controversy around Andrej Pejic and his censured cover? he was a male posing without a shirt but because he looks like a woman and appears to have small breast certain retailers wouldnt sell the mag unless it came with a black bag as if it were a porn mag...
I dont think men and women are that different when it comes to the human body and sex, it's just that it's ingrained that it's ok for men to desire a woman but not the other way around. A woman owning her body and sexuality is labeled a slut, people believe that we as a genre can't separate pleasure from feelings so a man who sleeps around is a playboy but the woman is a slut.
And the examples go on and on but I better end this rant before a mod comes along and warn me

^well, that's my point, how many mags for women showing male nudity are there? And why? if they were economically profitable there would be hundreds like men's mags. There are no male nudes for women because women don't buy it, because we are different. It's just a biological matter, men get excited by the sight, and excitation increases the production of sperm, that's it, it is not a patriarcal conspiration or women hate, just biology. The same way men like to watch at nude women, women like to show their bodies, again just a matter of biological complementation , we follow the program printed in our genes. Do you think this is sexist? well, complain to the creator then, I was just passing by...

I do think Birkin has a point and it was actually (even though he was indirectly disagreeing with me) why I agreed with the member that first called this sexist. Because it does take a rather sexist route but I'm not sure it's really for social reasons like you mention koko or biological ones. It's a complex topic but I think that the way women are interested in male nudity is different... at least I observe this among other women, it's very rare to see someone discussing technicalities the way men do and seek material based on that and in the amount men do (by technicalities I mean porn, nudes, their subcategories, etc), I certainly don't see pictures of, I don't know, Louis Garrel (trying to think of an actor that's hot to me) and think of sex or what he'd look like naked or anything that... futuristic really, these thoughts are mostly reserved to men I actually know or have some sort of connection with (isn't it the same for most women?!)... so I do think the approach varies with gender. Whether that's sexist or not I'm not sure but what is sexist is the way that it's currently acceptable to exhibit women or even talk about them when you've seen them being sexual... strongly tied with objectification (but also poor sexual education), I definitely think that can be regulated in some way but completely changed? I'm not sure.. because I do think there are differences in the way men and women regardless of their orientation seek, well, sex/reproduction.

I believe that it's a social matter that eg there are not many nude mags for women cause biologically women's arousal increases vaginal secretions which facilitates penetration so a woman's pleasure it also serves biology. I dont want to get on the topic of a 'creator' and religion cause that's a can of worms I rather not touch. But just a quick thought, the bible was written over 2000 years ago and it's filled with sexist stories...
Every person is different and so are their sex interests, I do talk about technicalities, porn, male nudity etc with like minded female friends or even women on the web. But to assume that the entire female population is this or that way is what bothers me, specially cause it's 2014 and it's the western world.
Anyway, I rather see Michael Fassbender in Shame than Jennifer Lawrence's nude pics... I wonder if there are pics of Scott Speedman? I rather see him than Teresa Palmer

I didn't mean to sound like a spokesperson nor I was assuming all women behave a certain way, I was mostly talking about experiences and observations and certainly did not bring up technicalities as a scale of repression (we all talk about it, that's a given?..).. and thank goodness we don't need magazine distribution numbers to validate a woman's ability to orgasm, cause yeah, it's 2014.

.. personally I'd rather see a a panda's nudes than Shame again. tastes, after all..

I know, Mullet. I was also speaking from the same place as you, just building up from your thoughts. This is indeed a complex issue, hard to properly articulate so many disparing points.
You didn't like Fassbender in Shame? shame on you! though pandas are cute

, I certainly don't see pictures of, I don't know, Louis Garrel (trying to think of an actor that's hot to me) and think of sex or what he'd look like naked or anything that...

i really like the beginning of american psycho, where christian bale is doing his exercises in his white underwear...

__________________Fashion: Don’t you recognize me? Death: You should know that I don’t see very well and I can’t wear glasses. Fashion: I’m Fashion, your sister. Death: My sister? Fashion: Yes. You and I together keep undoing and changing things down here on earth although you go about it in one way and I another. Giacomo Leopardi, “Dialogue Between Fashion and Death.”abridged

vaginal secretions have no relevance from the fertilization point of view, the amount of spermatozoon, yes. I mentioned the creator just to say something, you can replace the word creator by nature if you like. It doesn't matter that we are in 2014 or in the western world, we ALL do what genes told us to do, and in that regard, the whole specie is bound to certain behaviours that have nothing to do with the culture or the society, it's what we call instict, that can be supressed or stimulated, but it is always there.